The requestor might want to express that it needs the end point subject to
support Reference Key Identifiers as defined in WSS 1.0, the end point
subject can make the same requirements
<sp:Wss10>
<wsp:Policy>
<sp:MustSupportRefKeyIdentifier />
<sp:MustSupportRefIssuerSerial />
</wsp:Policy>
</sp:Wss10>
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
"Sergey
Beryozkin"
<sergey.beryozkin To
@iona.com> Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: cc
public-ws-policy- <public-ws-policy@w3.org>,
request@w3.org <public-ws-policy-request@w3.org>
Subject
Re: Policy expressions with no wire
09/20/2006 08:19 manifestation
AM
Can you please explain when and how a requester would use
<sp:MustSupportRefKeyIdentifier />
Thanks, Sergey Beryozkin
Iona Technologies
In WS-SecurityPolicy we have an assertion like
<sp:MustSupportRefKeyIdentifier />, this is not marked as wsp:optional and
does has no effect on the actual communication, if there is not a
intersection then it will fail. I don't understand why you think that
assertions that have no effect on the actual communication need to be
marked as wsp:optional.
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
Inactive hide details for "Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
"Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
"Sergey
Beryozkin"
<
sergey.bery
ozkin@iona. To
com>
Sent by: "Sergey Beryozkin" <
public-ws-p sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>,
olicy-reque Anthony
st@w3.org Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
09/20/2006
04:35 AM <public-ws-policy@w3.org>,
<public-ws-policy-request@w3.o
rg>
Subject
Re: Policy expressions with no
wire manifestation
Hi there
That was a response in a hurry so I take it back. Before flooding the
group concalls with trivial issues I'd rather attempt to make my question
as clear as possible. Note that I may indeed be confused, but if so then
I'd appreciate an answer which would help.
Consider this example :
<wsp:Policy>
<wsp:ExactlyOnce>
<oasis:QOSGuarantee>
<NeverFails/>
<TheBestServiceInThisCategory verifiedBy="..."/>
<oasis:QOSGuarantee>
<wsp/ExactlyOnce>
<wsp:Policy>
This is an example of a policy with a single alternative. This alternative
contains non-optional assertions
defined by a policy profile spec published a month ago. These assertions
have no wire manifestations.
A ws-policy aware (requester) entity whose runtime has not been updated
yet to recognize <oasis:QOSGuarantee> is about to start communicating with
the service which advertizes this policy.
Given the fact that it's likely ws-policy aware requesters will refuse to
start talking to a service should they fail to support the above policy
and that the fact whether this requester supports this policy or not will
have no effect on the actual communication with the service this policy
attached to, my understanding is that such assertions with no wire
manifestations SHOULD be marked as wsp:optional :
<wsp:Policy>
<wsp:ExactlyOnce>
<oasis:QOSGuarantee wsp:optional="true">
<!-- -->
<oasis:QOSGuarantee>
<wsp/ExactlyOnce>
<wsp:Policy>
This means a requester may use this policy for a service selection but
doesn't need to refuse talking to this service should it fail to recognize
the policy.
Does it make sense ?
What is the group's position on this issue ?
Thanks
Sergey Beryozkin
Iona Technologies